Sawfish patches/small battle units

[Ludwig]

Instituted very late in the war, 30th of November 1944, sawfish badges very seldom found their way to the frontline troops. Very few photos of soldiers wearing any grade of the badges exist.
There might be more than one producer (who can prove the contrary?), but IMO it´s not very likely.
If you find a sawfish badge awarded during the war (and not received after the war, at some veteran´s meeting!) it´s the version that I here call good.
And finally, I have seen the bad badge for sale at a homepage where they sold fakes only (as fakes!). You know the place where bikers buy badges and stuff, that we now and then can see here at the WAF and call fantasy or where really new beginners spend their pocket money, because they want a "cool nazi badge".
I´ll try to find that page again.

[Ludwig]

Hi Ludwig, your quote about "my intention wasn't to did too deep into this" says everything about the sawfish badges and your knowledge of them. You have spent a large amount of time studying these badges and yet you have posted very little for the collecting community in a forensic way to help other collectors of these pieces. I have watched your approach when it comes to these badges compared to the collectors who have gone out of their way to educate others on what makes one badge original from another. Please no words about helping the fakers, as we have seen this is B.S.
In closing, if only a few people know what makes an original an original don't complain when nobody wants to buy your patch.
jeff

I have posted all grades that I have, here, earlier during the years. You just have to look at the pictures or what else do you want me to do? Do you want me to give badges away for free? Don´t people have eyes? Just look at the badges! The difference is obvious! You don´t have to believe what I write and I am not complaining. I just thought it was strange. Or funny.

[Jeff V]

If all it took was to look at some pictures why did Dietrich write the Knight's cross book. All he had to do was just tell people to look at some pictures. Why are any books written, after all everyone has eyes and should be able to see what makes an original right. The fact is, you have never wanted to get into detail on these patches. We have never had any good discussions on here that I can remember discussing fakes, vet groups, and why the ones that are supposed to be original are original.
jeff

[Ludwig]

As far as I can remember there have been more than one discussion about sawfish badges and when it comes to those badges, you just have to look at them! The differences are so clear, that you don´t have to dig deep! Just as in many cases with metal badges. Sometimes, though, you can hardly see the difference between originals and fakes. This does not go for the sawfish badges. IMO.

You can see some of my badges and award citations in "The Kriegsmarine awards" by Weber and Skora.

[Norm F]

Well guys, while it's true that it has felt like pulling teeth to get any quality images with comparative analysis going on these patches, the truth is it's a small niche market with high prices and many fakes, so there are very few serious collectors of these to participate in such discussion.

For something like a Schwerin Minesweeper, loads of people can post examples but for these patches we've been limited to Ludwig as the only (known) member here owning anything with decent provenance or photographs of them in wear.

Like Jeff say, pronouncements of originality are of very limited use without some detailed presentation of forensic comparison to examples with known provenance or blowups of period photographs.

Ludwig's under no obligation to share his collection or his analyses with us, and if there were a bunch of other collectors posting known originals we wouldn't be so frustrated over his limited participation. It's probably better not to hear anything at all rather than what ends up sounding to collectors frustratingly like "I know something you don't", but so be it...so far this is all we have.

The pages in "The Kriegsmarine Awards" are a good general overview and reference text on the history of these awards but present no detailed analysis. The authors state that all the patches shown are period originals but only one example with known provenance appears, on page 985, and it's a Grade 1 badge (with no swords) and shows no view of the reverse.

Perhaps this is Ludwig's (I don't know). For reference here's the image, enlarged to show whatever detail we can make out, presumably a period original. This is a starting point.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

Here now is the controversial proficiency patch that is mentioned at the start of this thread. Thanks to JAndrew's hint about a "Friday feeding frenzy" I managed to find the images on Carsten Baldes' website.

It's the same type as the Weitze example that Ludwig showed in post #10.

[Norm F]

Now, a comparison between the unworn proficiency patch (no provenance) to the worn Level 1 patch with claimed provenance.

Bear in mind we're comparing apples to oranges since one is a proficiency badge while the other is a Level 1 combat badge, but nevertheless one can see that the orientation of the stitching on parts of the sawfish is clearly different. These are almost certainly not from the same maker.

Does this mean the proficiency badge is a fake? Not really, it simply means that without provenance one can make no claims of authenticity at this time, and it therefore requires a huge leap of faith and deep pockets to risk 600 Euro on this piece of cloth.

Best regards.
---Norm

[Norm F]

In contrast, here's the proficiency badge from Weitze that Ludwig posted in post #13, again compared to the Level 1 badge with provenance.

Although there are small differences, there is much more similarity between them, and considering they are two different grades of award, I would wager that these are both from the same producer.

[Norm F]

Here's another comparison, this time between the "typical" Weitze example from Ludwig's post #13 to the one from Ludwig's post #12 which he also thought was good. However, here you can see that the one from post #12, although very close, has an atypical saw horn with only 6 teeth instead of the usual 7. Also, the reverse stitching shows a different bobbin thread pattern.

So is the atypical one a fake or a variant? Again, without provenance I wouldn't want to risk it. Cloth is a minefield...especially expensive cloth.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

For comparison, here again is the Level 3 badge previously posted by Thomas Bendixen, from the Danish Armoury Museum in Copenhagen. Generally accepted as original, notice again the 7 teeth on the saw horn and the pattern of the white bobbin thread on the reverse. This is the same type that Ludwig posted from Weitze in post #15.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

So what else would we like to see in an ideal world?

I'd like to see the reverse of the example from "The Kriegsmarine Awards. I'd like to see more period examples with good provenance with both obverse and reverse views of them. And I'd like to see large blowups of period photographs of the awards in wear.

Best regards,
---Norm

[48RMC]

If you try to sell a 100% original Bewährungsabzeichen der K-Verbände (Sawfish cloth badge) here, you will most likely have to "go home with your hard on" (in other words: you will not get it sold), but today one of the more well known German dealers sold a fake for EUR 600.–...
P.S. To be honest, I don´t think that the dealer knew it was a fake.

Do we talk about B.... Militaria how sold such a badge last friday 2 pm? If so i don't think he was aware of this

[Jeff V]

Thanks Norm, that is a good start.
best wishes,
jeff

[BubbaZ]

Here are four examples of the proficiency patches from K-W site, one of tchem is marked sold for 540 eur. I understand from the above posts that all of them are of the accepted pattern?
Cheers,
Hubert

[BubbaZ]

3&4